It is generally accepted in most professions that the better you are, the more money you can command. Many teachers would agree the top in their field should be rewarded accordingly. So why is it that the Gillard government’s proposed performance-related payment scheme is not being welcomed with open arms? Read my full article in the Sydney Morning Herald.
For another take on the psychology behind motivation, and an insight into why the Gillard model of PRP may not achieve its aims, watch this short talk by internationally renowned author and speaker Dan Pink.[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc&w=560&h=315]
Sign up for email updates here, share with your friends or connect on Facebook or Twitter…
Category: Education, Leadership
Tagged: Dan Pink, education, education revolution, motivation, performance related pay, SMH, teachers, teaching
Hi Dan. I like your article. If Julia Gillard wants to reward teachers based on student performance data, lesson observations, parental feedback & qualifications, what message is this sending about the importance of all the extra-curricular activities that staff do in schools? Shall we not worry about music ensembles, concerts, musicals, sporting activities, camps……..? It’s a real worry.
You’re right of course… so many of the roles teachers play cannot be easily and quantifiably assessed. But I guess the “best” teachers do deserve “best” pay. It’s just a question of who defines “best” and it must be equitable… ie the notion that only 10% of teachers can access the scheme is inherently flawed.